Chelsea boots – a little embarrassing?!

[JFWR]

3. Yes, rock stars are famous for wearing their grey fleece vests and slim-straight jeans.

Emo/indie types wear stuff like this. It also reminds me of an outfit I'd see in the Pacific NW or in Colorado.

 

[Duke Santos]

I see:

1. Green shoes, grey, and blue shoes with red contrast laces
2. Bright orange oxfords worn with bad washed jeans
3. Tasteful oxfords but worn with obviously skinny pants (often chinos)
4. Sneaker-dress shoe hybrids
5. Lots of "fun socks."
6. A poster who posted a photo of his blistered bare toes, which ... ok.

Etc.

First off, good sir, I came to SF for the shoe Appreciation.........I stayed for the blistered bare toe Appreciation. Good day, Sir.

 

[Jax]

I sometimes wear the basic bastard uniform where I live and I look better than the vast majority of men, imo. It's a shitshow of graphic print t-shirts, cargo shorts, badly fitting unhemmed denim, and ugly sneakers here.

You just described the AE thread.

 

[Jax]

https://www.styleforum.net/threadattachments/696609

First page, I find the following poor choices:

1. Vibram lug soled strands.
2. Yellow laces on strandweaves.

Second page:

We have more loud ones from the aforementioned poster (who usually has really nice shoes/boots).

The also aforementioned poster with the strange sneakers in marbled shell.

1. A pair of dress sneakers.

Third page:

1. I don't like the striped-woolen boots.

Fourth page:

1. They're interesting (in that I have never seen them) but I don't think the reverse-shell boots work because of the toothpaste teal colour.
2. Blue with red laces.

I don't have an objection to the navy blue cap toes, but I know that's your bete noire, so I'll give you that, too.

1. Same blue cap toes.
2. Some green shell which Ik now you hate in a large Higgins Mill collection.

The majority of other styles are just....normal shoes. Black, brown, boots...I mean, maybe you'd get a little annoyed with there being a light blue suede shoe at one point. Blue suede, though, has been worn since at least the 40s.

Here is what you aren't understanding. It's not *just* about the shoes in that thread (or other shoe threads but AE is the worst). It's about what else is in those pictures sometimes as well. There may be normal MacNeils, and then you see 20 year old Wrangler straight leg denim. Why? It's bad style, not good.

 

[KarlHungus]

Here is what you aren't understanding. It's not *just* about the shoes in that thread (or other shoe threads but AE is the worst). It's about what else is in those pictures sometimes as well. There may be normal MacNeils, and then you see 20 year old Wrangler straight leg denim. Why? It's bad style, not good.

Perhaps you could post a photo (of yourself or of someone else) that is "good style." I hear a lot of negative commentary in your comments across all the threads you post in but have yet to see an effort to show us all how it should be done.

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

There used to be a member here named Voxsartoria who wrote a guide called "Practical Thoughts on Coherent Combinations." I think it was one of the best guides on here on how to dress in an "elegant" way. The OP might enjoy it.

MEGA

MEGA provides free cloud storage with convenient and powerful always-on privacy. Claim your free 50GB now!

mega.co.nz

Dear @dieworkwear – so, I read the guide. Thank you. I appreciate the time you took to save it and to share it with us. And it has a lot of very interesting points. (I will admit I find your writing style much clearer than Voxsartoria's. His style is so idiosyncratic that sometimes it's hard to know what he's driving at.) I would like to summarize my takeaways from the guide for everyone. And would ask you kindly to check if it is all correct. D'accord? Then I will redact this post to reflect your feedback.

If I understand correctly, in his guide, @voxsartoria explains that all of permanent men's fashion for everyday wear exists on a scale, which goes from most formal to least formal in 7 steps:

1) most formal: the city/formal look: solid (or very discreetly pin-striped) dark suit made of worsted wool, to be worn with grenadine silk unicolor ties and black or dark brown plain-toe or cap-toe Oxfords (minimal brogue-ing allowed). Hip pockets – straight flap. Breast pocket –a welt. Shirts – white or light blue or white and light blue stripes.

2) 2nd most formal: Can be combined with a) The navy blazer and other solid navy odd jackets.

3) 3rd most formal: the casual suit that can be combined with pieces from a): suits made in earth tones, of the same shape as a) but made of flannel, either solid colors or small scale glen check and houndstooth patterns. Ties can be made of materials other than silk.

4) 4th most formal: Odd Jackets that resolve to a solid except up close.

5) 5th most formal: the casual suit that can NOT be combined with a). Made of cotton, silk, linen, tweed, corduroy, sometimes with box patterns. Patch pockets ok. Multi-colored pocket squares ok. Ties can have patterns. Shirt patterns and colors ok, too.

6) least formal: obviously patterned odd jackets, all tweeds, heavily textured fabrics like corduroys, etc.

7) ridiculously informal: untailored jackets.

Open questions for me that I think only @dieworkwear can answer:

a) is this a correct summary, or am I missing something?

b) I assume Oxfords work only for 1) and 2) From what number onwards to derbies and monks and more heavy brogue-ing come in? It wasn't clear to me if it was from 3) onward or from 5 onward.

c) I was surprised that he said that the city/formal look (1) does not really have a pocket square, except as a loan from the less formal outfits. Do you agree with this?

d) he begins by saying that there are other guides that describe perfectly for the beginner how to to combine Colors, Patterns, Textures and Contrast. Do you know where I would find such a guide?

 

[Jax]

Perhaps you could post a photo (of yourself or of someone else) that is "good style." I hear a lot of negative commentary in your comments across all the threads you post in but have yet to see an effort to show us all how it should be done.

Ah, so what you're saying is you cannot post opinion's on a forum about style discussion without conforming to group think? You hear a lot of negative comments because I'm actually calling out what *I* view as bad style on a forum about style. Whether I post pictures or not is irrelevant to my own opinion. One thing that is rarely done is an actual coherent counter-argument from people. Instead it's straight attack mentality and group circle jerk in whatever brand ambassador thread I decide to respond in.

I don't just post hate filled nonsense, I do actually give an argument which is usually rather blunt I'll admit. I also post praise when it's warranted in threads as well. I just posted praise to someone in the Alden thread and said the poster was giving me outfit ideas but I don't see you mentioning that here. Also, I'm not going into WAYWT threads and criticizing entire outfits. In fact, I don't even post in those. I mostly criticize in brand specific threads like AE because the custom makeups, my own anecdotal evidence of quality, or style choices with the shoe is just so bad. Telling someone on a style forum they can't argue against shined oxfords with wide leg washed out Levi's or unhemmed denim is kind of stupid. I'm also not the only person laughing at some of the stupid custom jobs.

Really, why would you post pictures on a style forum without accepting that criticism is a possibility? Makes no sense.

 

[KarlHungus]

Ah, so what you're saying is you cannot post opinion's on a forum about style discussion without conforming to group think? You hear a lot of negative comments because I'm actually calling out what *I* view as bad style on a forum about style. Whether I post pictures or not is irrelevant to my own opinion. One thing that is rarely done is an actual coherent counter-argument from people. Instead it's straight attack mentality and group circle jerk in whatever brand ambassador thread I decide to respond in.

I don't just post hate filled nonsense, I do actually give an argument which is usually rather blunt I'll admit. I also post praise when it's warranted in threads as well. I just posted praise to someone in the Alden thread and said the poster was giving me outfit ideas but I don't see you mentioning that here. Also, I'm not going into WAYWT threads and criticizing entire outfits. In fact, I don't even post in those. I mostly criticize in brand specific threads like AE because the custom makeups, my own anecdotal evidence of quality, or style choices with the shoe is just so bad. Telling someone on a style forum they can't argue against shined oxfords with wide leg washed out Levi's or unhemmed denim is kind of stupid. I'm also not the only person laughing at some of the stupid custom jobs.

Really, why would you post pictures on a style forum without accepting that criticism is a possibility? Makes no sense.

No, what I was saying was less words, more pictures.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

No, what I was saying was less words, more pictures.

I just searched the What Are You Wearing... thread, and there wasn't a single fit from you ever for the entire almost 7 years you've been a member, so maybe... shut up already with these hypocritical demands?

Literary critics don't have to be authors. Music critics don't have to be musicians. People's arguments on these topics are based on their coherence and whether they make sense: yours and anyone else's.

(and it's "fewer" not "less"... )

 

[KarlHungus]

I just searched the What Are You Wearing... thread, and there wasn't a single fit from you ever for the entire almost 7 years you've been a member, so maybe... shut up already with these hypocritical demands?

Literary critics don't have to be authors. Music critics don't have to be musicians. People's arguments on these topics are based on their coherence and whether they make sense: yours and anyone else's.

(and its' "fewer" not "less"... )

Excuse me for living

 

[KarlHungus]

I just searched the What Are You Wearing... thread, and there wasn't a single fit from you ever for the entire almost 7 years you've been a member, so maybe... shut up already with these hypocritical demands?

Literary critics don't have to be authors. Music critics don't have to be musicians. People's arguments on these topics are based on their coherence and whether they make sense: yours and anyone else's.

(and its' "fewer" not "less"... )

I am sure you are smart enough to realize this but that thread is not the only one on this forum in which one can post pictures

 

[nh10222]

shut up already with these hypocritical demands?

What was that about 'lack of grace'?
And hypocrisy? Wow. Distinguished member, indeed.

coherence and whether they make sense: yours and anyone else's.

Ultimately vacuous rhetoric

(and it's "fewer" not "less"... )

That must be where you really shine.

 

[dieworkwear]

Dear @dieworkwear – so, I read the guide. Thank you. I appreciate the time you took to save it and to share it with us. And it has a lot of very interesting points. (I will admit I find your writing style much clearer than Voxsartoria's. His style is so idiosyncratic that sometimes it's hard to know what he's driving at.) I would like to summarize my takeaways from the guide for everyone. And would ask you kindly to check if it is all correct. D'accord? Then I will redact this post to reflect your feedback.

If I understand correctly, in his guide, @voxsartoria explains that all of permanent men's fashion for everyday wear exists on a scale, which goes from most formal to least formal in 7 steps:

1) most formal: the city/formal look: solid (or very discreetly pin-striped) dark suit made of worsted wool, to be worn with grenadine silk unicolor ties and black or dark brown plain-toe or cap-toe Oxfords (minimal brogue-ing allowed). Hip pockets – straight flap. Breast pocket –a welt. Shirts – white or light blue or white and light blue stripes.

2) 2nd most formal: Can be combined with a) The navy blazer and other solid navy odd jackets.

3) 3rd most formal: the casual suit that can be combined with pieces from a): suits made in earth tones, of the same shape as a) but made of flannel, either solid colors or small scale glen check and houndstooth patterns. Ties can be made of materials other than silk.

4) 4th most formal: Odd Jackets that resolve to a solid except up close.

5) 5th most formal: the casual suit that can NOT be combined with a). Made of cotton, silk, linen, tweed, corduroy, sometimes with box patterns. Patch pockets ok. Multi-colored pocket squares ok. Ties can have patterns. Shirt patterns and colors ok, too.

6) least formal: obviously patterned odd jackets, all tweeds, heavily textured fabrics like corduroys, etc.

7) ridiculously informal: untailored jackets.

Open questions for me that I think only @dieworkwear can answer:

a) is this a correct summary, or am I missing something?

b) I assume Oxfords work only for 1) and 2) From what number onwards to derbies and monks and more heavy brogue-ing come in? It wasn't clear to me if it was from 3) onward or from 5 onward.

c) I was surprised that he said that the city/formal look (1) does not really have a pocket square, except as a loan from the less formal outfits. Do you agree with this?

d) he begins by saying that there are other guides that describe perfectly for the beginner how to to combine Colors, Patterns, Textures and Contrast. Do you know where I would find such a guide?

I feel your summary captures some of the points in his guide, but is perhaps not the best summary. A little busy right now and can't rewrite his whole guide in a post. I suggest re-reading it.

I think oxfords are for suits. You can wear more casual shoes with suits, but I think oxfords are best with suits and not sport coats, and definitely not outfits involving things more causal than sport coats.

I don't believe Vox said that you can't wear a pocket square with a city suit. I know he wears one with city suits.

You can read Alan Flusser's Dressing the Man for more info about how to combine patterns.

I feel the best way to approach this is to just figure out how you want to dress, go to a store or a tailor to get some clothes, and then wear them for a while. You don't have to read about all of men's clothing to figure out how to wear a suit or sport coat. Just take these things in small bites at a time. Would be better to figure out how you want to dress for your environment, buy some simple things, and just learn as you go.

 

[nh10222]

I feel the best way to approach this is to just figure out how you want to dress, go to a store or a tailor to get some clothes, and then wear them for a while. You don't have to read about all of men's clothing to figure out how to wear a suit or sport coat. Just take these things in small bites at a time. Would be better to figure out how you want to dress for your environment, buy some simple things, and just learn as you go.

✅✅✅ Great advice

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

[